E 



Historical Address 



EBEN GREENOUGH SCOTT, 



DELIVERED AT THE 



T2? jomtng ♦ (JUonument 



JULY THIRD, 1893, 



On the Occasion of the Observance of the 



Anniversary of the Battle and Massacre, 



together 



With the Order of Exercises of the Day. 



PRINTED FOR THE 

Wyoming Commemorative Association. 



RECORD PRINT, W.-B 




Gass ^^yy 



/ £>i7 



Historical Address 



EBEN GREENOUGH SCOTT, 



DELIVERED AT THE 



T2?jomin5» QHonument 



JULY THIRD, 1893, 



On the Occasion of the Observance of the 



Anniversary of the Battle and Massacre, 



TOGETHER 



With the Order of Exercises of the Day. 

, 



• (^/^^ ,x, O^ 



PRINTED FOR THE 

Wyoming Commemorative Association. 



RECORD PRINT. W.-B 



( V 



9 My'OI 



Wyoming Commeffiorative Association 



Vice Presidents 



OFFICERS : 
President Calvin Parsons, Esq. 

Hon. L. D. Shoemaker. 

h. hollister, m. d. 

Hon. G. M. Harding. 
I Sheldon Reynolds, Eso. 
[ Mr. William L. Convngham. 

Secretary Mr. F. C. Johnson. 

Corresponding Secretary George H. Butler, Esq. 

Treasurer Dr. Harry Hakes. 

Librarian William A. Wilcox, Esq. 



Committee on Grounds, 
Benj. P\ Dorrance, 
ROBT. T. Pettebohe, 
Wm. H. Jenkins. 



Committee on Programme, 
Calvin Parsons, 
Sheldon Reynolds, 
Wm. a. Wilcox. 



'■V '■- 



O- 



ANNUAL MEETING 

OF THE 

Wyoming CommemoratiYe Association, 

JULY THIRD. 1893. 
At the Monument Grounds, Wyoming, Penn'a. 



Order of Exercises. 

1. Music— "The Pilgrim's vSong of Hope," Batiste 

Ninth Regiment Band. 

2. Prayer— Rev. S. C. Logan, D. D. 

3. Music- "The Noblest,". Schumann 

Ninth Regiment Band. 

4. President's Address— Capt. Calvin Parsons 

5. Music— Fantasia— "A Tale," ■B«c/i 

6. Hymn -"America," Orchestra and Audience 

7. Historical Address— E. Greenough Scott, Esq. 

S. Music— Selection — " Daughter of the Regiment," . . .Donizetti 

Ninth Regiment Band. 

f Henry A. Fuller, Esq. 
9. Brief Addresses— | ^r. Harry Hakes. 

10. Music— " luflammatus," Rossini 

Ninth Regiment Band 

11. Necrology— Wesley Johnson, Geo. H. Butler, Esq. 

12. Benediction— Rev. J. Richards Boyle, D. D. 

13. Music— "Soldier's Farewell," Kinkel 

Ninth Regiment Band. 

14. "Taps." 



Address — Eben Greenough Scott 



One-hundred and fifteen years ago, this very day, 
the sun shone down upon a scene which had this spot for 
its theatre ; a scene which, ever since then, has Hved in 
story, and which is still animate in the hearts of those de- 
scended from the men who suffered in the disaster of that 
day. The valley of the upper Susquehanna, from where 
the Chemung falls into it, southward to yonder break in 
the mountains, affords to-day a succession of charming 
views wherein intervales and dells, half-hiding old mills, 
and farmland studded with villages, are hemmed in by 
bold, wood-covered heights, between which flows the ever 
beautiful river. The blessed light of heaven, floods the 
landscape everywhere, and men come and go upon iron 
highways, and young men and maidens laugh and sing 
from boats upon the water. But in the bad old days, a 
forest, impenetrable to the sun's rays, shrouded the soil in 
gloom and mystery, so that the light failed to reach the 
ground, save at the river's bank or at an occasional clear- 
ing; nor was the passage of human beings practicable ex- 
cept upon the stream, or by the trail which wound along 
over the slippery roots of trees and the quaking hummocks 
of swamps. This trail and this river formed the path of 
communication between two races, between the white man 
and the red, between the New England settlers and the 
Iroquois, and these neighbors, by no means loving ones, 
even in the best of times, at the slightest alarm shunned 
the depths it traversed ; the region straightway became 
a dark and bloody ground, and, at the first note of hostil- 
ity, was left to the bear, the wolf, the panther and the 
venomous reptile. 



In the latter part of June, 1778, none but stealthy 
scouts dared to penetrate these " dowie dens," or peer into 
these brooding solitudes, and the word they brought back 
was as sinister as the haunted forest itself. All at once 
scouts and wild beasts alike fell back from the life that 
suddenly filled the woods ; for swarms of armed men now 
trooped their way along the trail or floated down the river 
in canoes. There was no music, no banners, no clanging 
cavalry nor rumbling artillery, no red-coated regulars, nor 
packhorses, droves of cattle, or wagons and tumbrils; but 
there strode along in single file copper-colored warriors, 
moccasined and with scalp -locks and feathers, with pend- 
ants, hanging from their ears and noses, and with their 
bodies painted in white, black, green, yellow and vermil- 
ion, and with wampum collars, silver bracelets and medals, 
and armed with gun, tomahawk and knife. These bedaub- 
ed and blanketed bands owed the little obedience they 
were capable of yielding to their allies and employers, 
who, in hunting shirts and leggings and carrying long mus- 
kets and rifles, gave to the motley column the slight appear- 
ance of regularity and order that it possessed. This latter 
element was white; it spoke English; it was American ; 
nay it was of our kindred blood, and among it were some 
who had tilled these very fields, and having fled from 
them, were seeking to regain them by arms even though 
it should cost the blood of their successors to the posses- 
sion. 

As this picturesque but deadly array drew near, its 
approach was manifested by the preparations to resist it 
that were made by those upon whom its blows were to 
fall. The little settlements that dotted this plain were all 
astir. Every nerve was strained to make good the want 
of those who were in distant camps, and when the enemy 
entered the valley, a sturdy little column of defenders 
marched up the road to receive him. This movement, 
from a military point of view, was a radically mistaken 
one, and was against the judgment of the leaders; it 



should have been made days before, when the enemy 
could have been ambushed in the woo Is and his advance 
retarded until our reinforcements arrived ; or it should not 
have been made at all, but our forces have been concen- 
trated at some point upon the opposite bank of the river. 
But it was made, and the inevitable results of a false move- 
ment ensued : our people met with speedy and irretriev- 
able disaster. 

There is no need of telling over again the oft-told 
tale, or reviewing the sickening scenes that followed our 
defeat. A cry of horror rose from the civilized world, and 
humanity, even on the floor of Parliament itself, protested 
against a recurrence of such barbarous warfare. The 
Massacre of Wyoming, however momentous it may have 
been to those immediately affected by it, was not of suffi- 
cient importance to directly vary, one way or the other, 
the result of the mighty contest then waging. It may 
have augmented our material force by reason of the sym- 
pathy abroad for the colonists which it had evoked, but 
this consideration is too doubtful and remote to be serious- 
ly entertained ; but its further indirect effects in mitigating 
the horrors of war, by arousing humane sentiment in op- 
position to savage warfare between civilized belligerents, 
were unquestionably important. Sufficient to say, that it 
was speedily avenged, though justice displayed reprehens- 
ible blindness in the proceeding, for retaliation fell almost 
exclusively upon the least responsible of the evil-doers, 
the Indians, and not upon the principals, the Tories, and 
the Massacre of Wyoming, an incident of the Revolution, 
had played its part. It became as a tale that is told, and 
passed into history. 

How shall we best commemorate this day? By the 
repetition of a century's eulogy and the repetition of a 
century's denunciation? The latter would betray a weak- 
ness that we certainly did not inherit from our ancestors; 
the former would be useless, for by this time mere eulogy 
has spent its force. Rather, let us praise the dead by 



8 

manifesting their virtues ; and the best way to eulogize 
those who have laid down their lives for a cause, is to set 
forth this cause in its nobility and simplicity. There was 
something more in this day's work on our part than mere 
defence of home. I have said that this action was an in- 
cident of the Revolution ; by the right or wrong, therefore, 
of the Revolution, must it be justified or condemned. Let 
us turn our attention for a moment, then, to consider 
whether the cause and the men were worthy of each other ; 
whether the cause had righteousness enough in it to justify 
the great rupture in our race, and to justify the blood that 
was poured out for it If it had such, then the men who 
fell here upon the third of July, seventeen hundred and 
seventy eight, should be partakers of the glory that always 
results from the success of a good cause. 

Some writers account for ihe Revolution solely upon 
politico-economical grounds. Others attribute it entirely 
to the oppressive efifect of the Navigation Act, or to the 
repressive effects of the acts against colonial manufactures ; 
others, again, to the fact that the tobacco growers and 
Southern planters were getting behind hand and were fall- 
ing in debt to British creditors, and others still to a long 
repressed and concealed spirit of contumacy, rather than 
of independence, which had no opportunity to make itself 
heard until the French wolf at their doors had been rend- 
ered harmless by the fall of Quebec. Others still attribute 
the revolt to colonial exasperation at imperial arrogance. 
Each of these views taken singly is too circumscribed and 
narrow to account for this tremenduous schism in the 
English speaking race. Each, it is t ue, had its place, 
and was a motive, but it was a subordinate motive. Each 
had its effect, but no single one could have accomplished 
such a mighty result. The acknowledgment of our in- 
dependence by the Treaty of Paris had justified our fore- 
fathers in taking up arms and pressing war to the bitter 
end. But of the reasons just specified was there any that 
taken singly would have justified the revolt in the eyes of 



our ancestors, themselves or in those of the world? The 
greater part of the colonists' came over or were born here 
after the Navigation Act had become one of the corner 
stones of British policy; after the acts of trade had stamp- 
ed these regions as British factories. The arrogance of Brit- 
ish officers had been curbed by the defeats of Braddock and 
Abercrombie and was really nothing but an irritation of 
the hour. We have the concurrent testimony of the best 
men North and South that while the supervision of the 
French revealed to the colonies their own powers, it did 
not arouse anything like a general desire for independence, 
and it is in vain to attribute the rupture to grievances 
arising from trade, when on the floor of the House of 
Commons and by political economists the world over, the 
British possessions in America were pointed to as illustra- 
tions of the most marvelous prosperity then known to men. 
In fact not only was the material prosperity of these colo- 
nies beyond comparison, but their political condition was 
almost Utopian. The colonists owned their land in fee 
simple, which was something the classes from which they 
sprung in Europe did not do ; they had their own judici- 
ary and their own parliaments ; they governed themselves ; 
they could not be taken across sea to fight battles of Great 
Britain; they had their own militia, and if this was n 't 
sufficient Great Britain was bound to defend them; they 
taxed themselves and not one penny could be drawn from 
them by imperial tax gatherers. Thus they were their own 
men and while they shared the benefits of the empire they 
were exempt from its burdens. Is it credible then that 
the Adamses, the Dickinsons, the Franklins, the Washing- 
tons, the Randolphs and the like could have ever justified 
themselves for subverting this happy state by reason of 
economical conditions which enriched them ; by arrogance 
at which they could afford a contemptuous smile ; by the 
sense of power which the downfall of dangerous neighbors 
had aroused ; by the paltry indebtedness of a few plant- 
ers ; by the restraint on navigation, which was really in 



lO 

compensation of maritime defense, or by any reason which 
savored of the personal rather than the pohtical? 

No. They revolted because, from change of policy 
on the part of the home government these halcyon days 
were numbered, and through no fault of their own. Let 
it be clearly understood that our fathers took up arms, 
not to gain more, but to save as much as they could of 
what they already had. Not one of those men was so de- 
luded as to suppose that he would gain by independence. 
On the contrary he knew well that such a Utopia as he 
had enjoyed could never be his again; that the best could 
not be bettered, and that if there was anything hazardous 
in this world it was to cast his fortune on that which never 
yet improved the citizen's condition — civil war. " There 
was not a moment during the Revolution," said John 
Adams, " when I would not have given everything I pos- 
sessed for the restoration to the state of things before the 
contest hegdixx, provided, we could have had a sufficient se- 
curity for its continuance." There is the whole thing in a 
nutshell. The "security for its continuance" was want- 
ing. 

The colonist's liberties and prosperity did not exist 
by right but by grace. Constitutional guaranty was lack- 
ing. We had no Bill of Rights and there lies the reason 
of the Revolution, All the other reasons so painfully 
dwelt upon are but incentives, if they amount to anything 
at all. But here is the great reason, the great motive of 
the revolt, that the colonial franchises which had been 
conferred by charter or acquired by time and custom were 
to be held as matters of grace and not of right, and that 
colonial prosperity henceforth was to be subject to the 
uncertain need of the imperial treasury. 

It is not surprising, since the later American writers 
have indulged such narrow views of the motives of the 
Revolution of seventeen hundred and seventy-six, that the 
later British writers are to be found clinging to the still nar- 
rower opinion of their predecessors, and that they betray a 



tl 

want of correct insight of the object of that Revolution. 
Thus in the fifty-first chapter of his history, Lord Mahon 
expresses the opinion, that had Lord Chatham's bill be- 
come a law, the Americans would have accepted it cheer- 
fully; for it provided for the independence of the judici- 
ary, it restricted the Admiralty courts to ancient limits, it 
reinstated the situation of seventeen hundred and sixty- 
four, and it recognized the general Colonial Congress. 
But the independence of the judiciary was already ours by 
a right superior to any that Parliament could confer; the 
ancient limits of the courts of Admiralty did not depend 
upon Parliament for their definition ; while the recognition 
of Congress was coupled with the assertfon of the suprem- 
acy of the British Parliament. This, of course, was utterly 
out of the question, from the colonial standpoint; it was 
asking all to concede that which each had already refused 
to yield, or, worse still, it was empowering Congress, the 
creature of the colonies, to grant that which the colonies, 
its creators, had brought it into being for the purpose of 
frustrating. Evidently, Lord Mahon failed to see that the 
opposing of the Americans was to Parliament as a ruler 
and not as a legislator, and that Congress itself was a 
standing denial to the supremacy of Parliament, 

Thomas Babington Macaulay, in the twenty-third 
chapter of his History of England makes this surprising 
assertion : " Down to the moment of separation the Cong- 
ress fully acknowledged the competency of King, Lords, 
and Commons to make laws, of any kind but one, for 
Massachusetts and Virginia. The only power which such 
men as Washington and Franklin denied to the Imperial 
legislature was the power of taxing." It is to be regretted 
that Lord Macaulay did not fortify his assertion respect- 
ing the attitude of Congress towards Parliament by proofs 
of the same. Respecting his assertion, that such men as 
Washington and Franklin admitted the supremacy of Par- 
liament in everything except the power of taxing, it is 
likewise unfortunate that he has given us no instance, but 



12 

has confined himself merely to assertion. John Adams, 
the great agitator, was such a man as Washington and 
Franklin, and in respect to everything bearing upon the 
genesis of the Revolution was of much higher authority 
than Franklin who during all the time in which the Revo- 
lution was hatching was a resident of London, and there- 
fore not in touch with the public opinion of those times in 
America; or than Washington, who, as every American 
school boy knows, was living remote from public affairs 
at Mt. Vernon, and had to be drawn from his chosen ob- 
scurity to take his seat in Congress. Now this is what 
Adams says, and one might almost suppose that he had 
risen from his grave to answer this very assertion of Mac- 
aulay; here it is: " The truth is, the authority o' Parlia- 
ment was never generally acknowledged in America. 
More than a century since, Massachusetts and Virginia 
both protested against even the act of navigation, and re- 
fused obedience for this very reason, beca ise they were 
not represented in Parliament, and therefore were not 
bound " You will find this in the life works of John 
Adams, Vol. IV., pp. 47 and 48, and you will observe, 
that Adams, like Macaulay, cites the same colonies as il- 
lustrations of his contradiction, if you choose to call it so, 
which Macaulay did of his assertion, viz. : Massachusetts 
and Virginia, though, unlike Macaulay, Adams gives his 
proofs, viz.: the legislation, record evidence itself, of 
these colonies concerning the Act of Navigation. Surely 
here was one chapter in the history of America which the 
historian of England apparently had not read. 

But what are we to say of one who is much more of 
a historian than Mahon, and much more of a historian, 
too, than Macaulay; a man broader and deeper than eith- 
er of them, with a far more correct notion of the real na- 
ture of history than Macaulay ever displayed, and one 
who is not given to recklessness of statement. Yet this is 
what Mr, Lecky told a Birmingham audience, only 266 
days ago, in an address since published under the title of 



13 

"The Political Value of History." After setting forth, 
that the Seven Years War had involved England in taxa- 
tion under which she was reeling ; that the old American 
colonies had benefited by this war more than any other 
part of the Empire ; and that, if France ever regained her 
strength, one of her first objects would be to recover her 
dominion in America, he continues : " Under these circum- 
stances Grenville determined that a small army of ten 
thousand men should be kept in America, under the dis- 
tinct promise that it was never to serve beyond that 
country and the West Indian Isles, and he asked America 
to contribute i^ioo,ooo a year, or about a third part of its 
expense. 

" But here the difficulty arose * * * there was no 
single Parliament representing the American colonies, and 
it soon became evident that it was impossible to induce 
thirteen State Legislatures to agree upon any scheme for 
supporting an army in America. Under these circum- 
stances Grenville in an ill-omened moment resolved to 
revive a dormant power which existed in the Constitution, 
and levy this new war-tax by Imperial taxation. We at the 
same time guaranteed the colonists that the proceeds of 
this tax should be expended solely in America; he inti- 
mated to them in the clearest way, that if they would meet 
his wishes by themselves providing the necessary sum, he 
would be abundantly satisfied, and he delayed the enforce- 
ment of the measure for a year in order to give them 
ample time for doing so. 

" Such and so small was the original cause of differ- 
ence between England and her colonies!' 

This statement was made on the tenth of October last 
(1892), and it maybe accepted as the latest expression of 
the British historical writers concerning the cause of the 
American Revolution. Mr. Lecky's statement of the facts 
is not so incorrect as to call for revision here, but his as- 
sumption of the power of Parliament to tax us must meet 
with flat contradiction. It is true that he touches this 



14 

subject gingerly — it was "a dormant power " and Gren- 
ville resolved to " revive " it. Biit, when had this dormant 
power ever been an active one ? Nut in the history of 
Ireland, which had never been taxed by the Imperial Par- 
liament; never in the history of Scotland, before the Act 
of Union, and never before in the history of America. 
When then had this dormant power been an active one, 
and when had it gone to sleep to awake at this "ill-omened 
moment " ? 

The truth is, that the history of England, Ireland, 
Scotland and America may be ransacked in vain for one 
single instance of this power active or dormant, living or 
dead. 

" Such and so small," says Mr. Lecky, was the origi- 
nal cause of difference between England and her colon- 
ies." Then the Revolution is not to be accounted for on 
politico-economical grounds, nor on the Navigation Act 
nor Manufacturing acts, nor on the tobacco-growers' 
debts, nor on the uppishness of British Army officers, nor 
upon the colonial desire for independence, nor upon any- 
thing else than Grenville's needless revival of a dormant 
power whose existence is, to say the least, doubtful 
When the distinguished historian began his remarks upon 
the subject, he prefaced them by saying, that "you will 
often hear this event treated as if it were simply due to 
the wanton tyranny of the English government * * * but 
you will find that this is a gross misrepresentation." As I 
had never heard or read any intelligent American treat 
this subject in such a reckless way, I supposed that he re- 
ferred to English writers unknown to us but with whom he 
was familiar Since his solemn statement of Grenville re- 
viving a dormant power, however, a fact on its face savor- 
ing of the tyrannical, I am myself almost persuaded that 
his statement is true. 

No, my friends, Grenville's act was not the cause of 
our Revolution, but a mere irritant of it. His act was in- 
terpreted in these colonies to mean that absolutism had 



15 

taken the field against them, and that, if they meant to 
show themselves men, the colonists must meet and over- 
throw it. How could Mr. Lecky overlook the fact that 
Grenville himself admitted this in his last recorded expres- 
sion concerning the taxation of the colonies: "Nothing" 
said he, "could induce me to tax America again but the 
united consent of King, Lords and Commons, supported 
by the united voice of the people of England * * I will 
never lend my hands towards forging chains for America 
lest in so doing I should forge them for myself." It was, 
then, absolutism which had been dormant and which was 
revived when we had this Bill of Rights to protect us, and 
the men that fell upon this field, fell victims to the Angli- 
can absolutism of the eighteenth century. 

First, then, to follow the sequence of time in its de- 
velopment, the cause that brought our forerunners upon 
this field was resistance to absolutism and the determina- 
tion to establish colonial liberties upon the ground of right 
and not of grace. Secondly, as the necessity became 
clearer and more convincing, this sentiment developed in- 
to the desire for independence, which after the fourth of 
July, seventeen hundred and seventy-six, became the final 
motive of the revolt, and Thirdly, the Americans who 
fought on this field had another motive in the actual de- 
fence of their homes. Surely these men had a righteous 
cause, and by their self-sacrifice proved themselves worthy 
of their cause. 

Let us show ourselves worthy of their cause and their 
sacrifice by adding to our commemoration to-day the per- 
formance of a duty. Our cause and the reputation of 
those who gave up their lives for it, are secure. Nothing 
can tarnish their glory, but their descendants can add to it 
by being just. We are not here, upon this spot, to apolo- 
gize for the Tories, or to exalt the Loyalists ; but, while I 
abhor and execrate those to whom is justly due the hated 
epithet of Tory, men like those who brought such woe upon 
this valley, I feel that we should show our self-respect by 



i6 

respecting those whose misfortune it proved to be to differ 
v/ith us in opinion, and I have therefore, a word to say for 
the Loyahsts. 

The adherents of the royal government were of two 
distinct classes, and let me assure you that there was very 
little affinity between them. We need no stronger proof 
of this, than the stipulation made by the New York exiles 
when they settled in Nova Scotia,* that the obnoxious ele- 
ment should not be introduced among them. They and 
our forefathers took the same view of these persons, and, 
consequently, we have substantial grounds for making a 
distinction between the apostates, the vengeful, the 
cruel, the greedy, the restless and self-willed, whom 
we include in the word " Tory," and the orderly, the well- 
regulated, the intelligent and honorable people whom we 
class as " Loyalists." Our fathers made this distinction in 
their time, and it is only fair that we should maintain it in 
ours. We all know that some of the best people in the 
land were among those who abandoned home, property, 
friends and relatives sooner than countenance that which 
they believed to be wrong They acted in the fear of God 
and love of their king: our forefathers acted from the fear 
of God and love of independence. Both sides, then, had the 
moral motive of their cause in common, and differed only 
in the political motive. Their good should be confounded 
with their bad no more than ours should be. Hutchinson 
should not be polluted with the title that belongs to Girby, 
but let him and the DeLanceys, the Sewalls and the Du- 
lanys, bear the name which was bought by their self-sacri- 
fice and which became sacred to them. Loyal to their 
King they were, and no self-respecting American should 
ever fail to observe the distinction made by our ancestors, 
and, while he stigmatizes the unworthy with the hated 
name of Tory, do mere justice to the upright by designat- 
ing them with the honorable title of Loyalists. 



*.Tndge Ilaliburloii ; Historical aud SUilislical Account of Nova Scotia, 
II. 195. 



17 

The Loyalist deserved a better fate than to have his 
name hnked by posterity with those whose deeds he con- 
demned and with whom he scorned to associate No- 
where in the chronicles is there a more pathetic scene 
than that which occurred when the news of the peace 
reached New York. To the last the Loyalists believed 
that the King would have his own again and that they 
would return triumphant to their homes. When the hard 
reality broke upon them, they were plunged into despair. 
Ruin stared them in the face : Some "tore the lappels 
from their coats and stamped them under their feet and 
exclaimed that they were ruined ; others cried out that 
they had sacrificed everything to prove their loyalty, and 
were now left to shift for themselves, without the friend- 
ship of their King and country."* Possessed with the idea 
that the> would become victims to the insensate fury of 
their countrymen, if they remained where they were, 
twelve thousand men, women and children crowded 
transports and accompanied the British fleet in the evacua- 
tion of New York. On the southern shore of Nova Scotia, 
there is a charming bay, where a little village and farms 
come down to the water. In seventeen hundred and eighty- 
two it was a solitude. In seventeen hundred and eighty- 
three a large town often thousand people, housed in huts of 
bark and rough boards suddenly appeared ; it lasted but 
a short time and the place relapsed into desolation. Pov- 
erty, distress, the irruption of the obnoxious class against 
which they had protested, and the inhospitable climate 
had scattered the refugees. And what was the character 
of these unfortunates? "Among the banished ones thus 
doomed to misery," says Sabin.f "were persons whose 
hearts and hopes had been as true as Washington's own ; 
for, in the divisions of the families which everywhere oc- 
curred, and which formed one of the most distressing cir- 
cumstances of the conflict, there were wives and daughters, 
who, although bound to Loyalists by the holiest ties, had 
* Sabine's Loyalists, I. 90. f Id., id. 91. 



given their sympathies to the right from the beginning; 
and who now, in the triumph of the cause which had had 
their prayers, went meekly, as woman ever meets a sorrow- 
ful lot, into hopeless, interminable exile " This is what is 
said of them by a man, both of whose grandfathers were 
officers in the American army during the Revolution. 

No fiirther seek their merits to disclose, 
Or draw their fraikies from their dread abode, 
(Where they alike in t'cnbling hope repose.) 
The bo?om of their Father and their God. 

With a kind word, then, for those who honestly differ 
from us in opinion, and with intense sympathy and sorrow 
for those, who, having faith in us and in our cause, found 
their lot cast among our enemies, let us turn from the past 
to the present, and in a moment when we are taking the 
nations of the world to our bosom, greet with all our heart 
the great people from whom we severed ourselves, but 
who have come to behold our prosperity and to rejoice at 
it. The soil upon which we stand will not have been soak- 
ed with the blood of its defenders in vain, nor the memory 
of that bitter day be worthless, if the lesson taught be that 
of peace on earth and good will to men. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



01 1 802 073 A 



